C-Span has been a tremendous resource for voters who want to make an informed decision come this November 4th. 6abc and 7abc aired a debate last Sunday between Cory Booker and Jeff Bell. The debate aired at 11am on 7abc and 1pm on 6abc(when everyone is watching football games).The debate was scarcely promoted and only shown once.

One great thing that C-span has been doing is showing debates on its network and allowing people to post them on their website. Unfortunately, while every political debate in the nation can be seen in its entirety on C-span's website, the NJ US senate debate between Booker and Bell cannot be seen because because 6abc is inexplicably won't allow it. C-span has shown the debate 5 times on its network. However, most people aren't too aware of C-span's programming and it would obviously be far more convenient if C-span could show the debate online like every other debate. Neither 7abc or 6abc are offering the debates on their websites

New Jersey Republican U.S. Senate nominee Jeff Bell on Friday issued a response to WPVI’s decision to remove the 2014 U.S. Senate debate from further viewing. Bell said: “On Wednesday, WPVI (Philadelphia’s ABC affiliate Channel 6) ordered C-Span to remove New Jersey’s only 2014 U. S. Senate debate from the C-Span website. Since Channel 6 is not offering the debate for viewing on its own website, this means that the only debate between Senator Cory Booker and me is no longer available online to the voters who will decide this election next Tuesday. This is a decision by a major news organization to suppress a program that the very same news organization, itself the main media sponsor of the debate, has described as an essential service to the public.

“I commend C-Span for televising the debate five times in the last four days, and regret the decision of the debate’s producer, Channel 6, to deny a similar opportunity to its own viewers and to the voters of our state.” With press inquiries, please contact Bell for Senate Press Secretary Gia Coluccio at (732) 851-3506 or Gia@Bell2014.com

Anyone who watched Cnn's coverage of the Fergusen Police shooting and the protests that followed could clearly hear the anti local police slant on their coverage.What's going on with how militarized the police are? How violent are the protests? Is this all this really necessary?~ Jake Tapper

One does wonder if an officer of the law has disdain for the first amendment, if he cares much about any of the other ones as well. Are you surprised that the governor announced that highway patrol was taking over security for this area, a slap in the face to the local police? ~ Jake TapperWhen the state took over controlling the protesters from the local authorities, headed by Captain Ron Johnson, Cnn acted like he was a night in shinning armor coming in to save the day from the horrible local police who's poor judgement probably caused much of the violence.The fact he is an African-American commander with the highway patrol does send somewhat of a signal that they are applying resources and utilizing people that may have that level of sensitivity that's needed on the ground right now. I believe that captain Ron Johnson will bring that to the forefront, which is well needed at this point. ~ Gray (Brown Family Attorney) responding to a Jake Tapper question about Captain Ron Johnson's effect on violence.When asked if the local police were overly aggressive and militarized, Captain Ron Johnson responded:We're going to go back in a sense today and we're going to start from today. We're not going to look back in the past. When we talk about boots on the ground, my boots will be on the ground. And actually, I plan on myself walking to the quick trip that has been called ground zero and meeting with the folks there myself tonight.

And so we are going to have a different approach and have the approach that we're in this together. So that's going to be an approach we'll have tonight. And look at our resources and make sure we're not taking resources out there that we don't need.It seemed Captain Ron Johnson was going to take a softer approach. He even said if we encounter problems we will use "communication" and not "gas masks" to solve them. It really seamed as if he was dissing the local police. Saturday night, after more looting and more buildings being burned, the heralded, the reasonable, the great communicator, Ron Johnson and his state police, once again had to enforce the curfew, use tear gas and militarized vehicles.Several days later and there is no attempt by CNN to look back and say 'Maybe the local police didn't do such a horrible job controlling the crowd." Even though the violence has continued and is worse than its ever been. Instead they report that the violence is only coming from a small number of people and they are from outside the city. The fact is, even a cnn reporter briefly noted that those engaging in the violence were wearing masks and were intermingled with the crowd of protesters. That makes it kind of difficult to go after those committing violence and leave the non-violent protesters alonehttp://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1408/14/cg.01.html

I don't think Christine Romans, CNN' chief business reporter, has said a bad thing about the economy since Obama has become president. She is always positive whether the numbers are good or bad or somewhere in the middle. If everything she said was true, by now we would be enjoying the biggest economic boom ever.'Four percent economic growth in the second quarter, that's what the government statistics are telling us. What we see here in this economic report that shows an economy back on track, Carol, is that consumers bought cars and furniture and dishwashers, those durable goods. Consumers were investing and consumers were buying things. You could see businesses investing in new technology, in software, in equipment, and you can see other countries buying our exports to a greater degree.

So, all those things together making gross domestic product better than expected.

You can see that red bar on your chart there, that was that terrible freeze, the deep freeze in the economy in the first quarter. It wasn't as bad as first reported, down about 2.1%, so not only was it not as bad in the winter as government economists first tallied, but also the second quarter stronger than expected.

The most important thing here, Carol, we'll see this momentum carries through to the second half of the year, that businesses and consumers and other countries are confident in our products and confident to spend, that's going to be really important to make this carry through, Carol. '

4% is a bad number. IT means the economy only grew at .9% or even less(the math is more complicated than you think)for the first half of the year. The second qtr was supposed to make up for that -2.1 but we just got another mediocre number. If all we get is 4% for the 2,3, and 4th uarters we will only end-up at about 2% for the year, maybe less. Bush senior was kicked out of office for a weak economy. Remember Clinton's"Its the economy stupid". Bush senior's last 4 quarters in office were 4 to 4.8% . To achieve the same employment rate and labor participation rate that we had at the height of the Bush recovery we would need 3 to 4 hundred thousand jobs a month for a while. we only got 209000. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1407/30/cnr.01.html

Sean Bergen appeared on a Fox News' Show with Megan Kelly and said 'I broke the rules. I knew I was breaking the rules. But sometimes you have to break the rules to do the right thing.'

He also pointed out that he was well aware that he went "beyond the reservation". Bergin said that he expected to get a reprimand or a suspension and would then be able to return to his regular job.Instead he was suspended but only offerred a once a week position for $300 a week.When Bergin gave his opinion saying 'It's important to shine a light on this anti-cop mentality that has so contaminated America's inner cities,' Bergin said. 'The underlying cause of all of this, of course, young black men growing up without fathers,' he explained that part of the reason he said this was that the police didn't want him to air the video of Lawrence Campbell's widow saying he should have "shot all the cops". Knowing that the police department was going to be very angry with him for airing the video he felt compelled to make the comment criticizing the mentality behind her comments and pointing out why he believes that mentality exists.I understand why News 12 wants to maintain objectivity and keep opinion out of their newscasts. They want to be fair and not allienate any of their viewers. However, like I said in my last blog, he never would have been fired if he was criticizing some white racists for something. I do think it's possible that if all he did was focus on shaming and exposing that mentality and not gotten into why that mentality exists he may have gotten less of a punishment and maybe none at all. I sympathize with him, but I am objective enough to admit he had kind of an in your face attitude when he made his views known. It was as if he was saying 'everyone knows I am right and the liberal media just doens't want to admit it. I personally feel unsure about why that mentality exists and think it may have a little bit more to do with the gangster rap culture which heavily glorifies the Thug mentality and the unwillingness to speak out against that mentality out of fear of being called a racist. When people are afraid to speak out against what is clearly wrong, it flourishes. I think he, and a lot of us are fustrated about that and sympathize with him. This attitude needs to be shamed and exposed. That part of what he said, I totally agree with.

Melvin Santiago, a 23 yearold police officer, was shot to death answering a 911 call for an armed robbery this passed Sunday morning. The shooter, Lawrence Campbell, never tried to rob the store. He walked in with a knife and asked where the greeting cards were. He then assaulted a security gaurd. Realizing that the cops were called he told a bystander that he was "going to be famous". and he stood and waited for the police to come. He then shot Melvin Santiago as he exited his vehicle. He himself was then shot to death.What has outraged people is that there was a memorial set up for the killer. The memorial actually celebrates his criminal lifestyle with the words 'Thug life and a newspaper cut-out reading 'Cop Killer'. Many people from this mostly black community contributed to the memorial. It has been taken down and put back up again. When reporters talked to his widow she said that she wished he took more cops down with him. This reaction, coupled with the memorial really made an impact on Sean Bergin, a reporter for news 12 New Jersey. Along with his reporting of the facts he made a commentary while on the air at news 12 seen here.

Here's what Bergin said:“We were besieged, flooded with calls from police officers furious that we would give media coverage to the life of a cop killer. It’s understandable. We decided to air it because it’s important to shine a light on the anti-cop mentality that has so contaminated America’s inner cities. This same, sick, perverse line of thinking is evident from Jersey City, to Newark and Patterson to Trenton.” “It has made the police officer’s job impossible and it has got to stop. The underlying cause of all of this, of course: young black men growing up without fathers. Unfortunately, no one in the news media has the courage to touch that subject.”

News 12 has said they suspended him indefinitely and they haven't yet decided if he will be fired. The reason they gave for disciplining him was that there reporters are never supposed to give opinions. They are only supposed to give unbiased reporting of the facts.

It's certainly understandable that News 12 wants to keep it's reporters objective and doesn't want to allienate viewers with different views. I am not even sure that black men growing up without fathers is the reason. But there certainly seems to be a mentality that celebrates the criminal life style in the black community. By black community, I mean mostly poor Inner city area's and it has even spread somewhat to middle class areas. Although it is largely among blacks it has spread to whites as well.It has certainly been spurred on by rap music which has been glorifying the criminal lifestyle for a long time. Suspending Sean Bergin seems a little harsh to me. If some racist whites committed a crime against a black person and he talked about problems about how some white kids were being raised there is no way he would have been fired. At most they would have given him a warning off the air and told him to he can make his opinions known in another forum.

Gwen Ifill failed to ask Tim Geithner a single question about his revelation that Obama administration officials asked him to lie about social security adding to the national deificit while interviewing him for PBS News Hour.PBS is taxpayer funded news network that has long been criticized for being ideologically in favor of democrats and partison in their news reporting. This is a glaring example of that bias.There is simply no way in the world that if any republican in the Bush administration had admitted that he was asked to lie, that Gwen Ifill would not have asked a question about it.She also appears on This Week on ABC on Sunday mornings where she appears regularly on a panel not as a liberal but as someone to give objective analysis and always slants her comments to favor democrats.You don't have to be a conservative or a republican to have asked Geithner why administraion officials asked him to lie to the american people. You simply have to be somenone who is not a partison who is trying to help democrats. Gwen Ifill doesn't meet that qualification.

Kurtz goes after documantary film maker who exposes liberal deceit

Howard Kurtz, host of Fox News' The Buzz, went after 'conservative'(as he refers to him) film maker James O'Keefe for his sting video exposing Hollywood celebrities Ed Begley, Mariel Hemingway, and producer Josh Tickell and his wife, for willingly attempting to work with a middle east oil company to produce an anti-fracking movie. Kurtz mentions one instance where some editing was done that made Begley appear as though he was responding to one comment when he was actually responding to something else. Scroll below for videoHere is the comment:UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If Washington, D.C. continues fracking, America will be energy efficient, and then they won't need our oil anymore. And you're in with us on this, right?ED BEGLEY JR.: Oh, yes. Only where the money comes from.Not exactly sure how this how this this discredits the whole point of the video which is that the people named were asked if they would agree to make an anti-fracking movie that would be funded by a middle east oil company. He even said the middle east oil company only wanted to eliminate fracking so the U.S. couldn't become energy independent and they would need middle east oil. The above named, particulary Josh Stickell, talked about the need to keep the funding a secret. The celebrities said it didn't matter where the funding came from. In his interview with Mariel Hemingway, aside from criticizing Okeefe for taking comments out of context through his editing, he aslo calls the video a scam and refers to the taping as surreptitious.During the interview Kurtz has an overtly sympathetic and friendly posture with Hemingway even as he asks her: You just played along? Refering to the undercover actor who let her know that a middle east oil company would be funding the film for the purpose keeping america dependent on middle east oil. Hemingway dances around the question and Kurtz doesn't press her. Kurtz mentions that Okeefe believes that this film reveals hypocrisy for agreeing to receive middle east oil money, while going out of his way to say she wouldn't be getting any of the money and pauses for a response. All she does is say she is not a film maker so who is she to go telling people about where the money is coming from and that she didn't know she was being taped.How about this question: Do you think there was anything wrong with them accepting middle east oil money to make the anti-fracking film and then conspiring to keep it a secret?In her interview with Howard Kurtz she gives an impression of this lunch meeting that seems to be a bit misleading. She acts like the whole thing was just 'weird', but in watching the tape, the others seem to take it very seriously Mariel Hemingway set up the meeting but she did not seem to be a major player in the discussion. That seemed to be Josh Tickell, the producer who clearly acknowledges the reason the middle east oil company is funding this as well as the need to keep it a secret. Any good and objective reporter would have asked Hemingway about those comments, but not Kurtz.Kurtz just continues the friendly discussion saying "It sounds like a bad Hollywood movie" and ends the segment by saying his problem with O'keefe is that he uses deception in a way that undermines his case. Somebody tell Howard Kurtz that is called undercover reporting and he couldn't have made the case with out it. Neither could he have made the case about acorn.

While speaking at a conference about political strategy with Democrat Robert Gibbs Karl Rove claimed that Hillary Clinton spent 30 days in hospital and when she reappeared she was wearing glasses reserved for people who had suffered traumatic brain injury.Why Karl Rove said Hillary Clinton was in the hospiital for 30 days, I can't say. All I can say is that she was only in for three. She had a few of other doctor visits regarding a stomach virus, a fall she took while she was weakened by a stomach virus, and a blood clot believed to be caused by the fall. All these events happened within about a 30 day period in December/January, but she was only an out paitent. His other comment was not challenged to my knowledge, so I suppose it could be true. The accusations that he has claimed Hillary has brain damage were also innaccurate nor did he even suggest it, but on that point you can make up your own mind. Clearly the media attacks on Rove not just coming from commentators but news anchors as well, were completely innappropriate and unwarranted.Hillary Clinton was out of service for about a month and could not testify on the Benghazi attacks when the republicans wanted to because of it. She did testify several months later. While on Hannity Rove said that he did not intend to suggest that Hillary had brain damage and added that it's "obvious she does not have brain damage."If Hillary Clinton runs for president, Rove pointed out that the media has always demanded to see the medical records of past presidential candidates and that they would demand hers also. So if she has anything to hide it would come out then. He also pointed that some of the older past republican candidates had critical stories run about their age and that if they wanted to be consistant, she should get the same treatment. If Hillary Clinton were elected to office she would become the oldest U.S. president in history at the time of her first inaugeration.http://pagesix.com/2014/05/12/karl-rove-hillary-clinton-may-have-brain-damage/http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2014/05/15/karl-rove-sets-record-straight-about-hillary-health-remarks

MORE EMAIL REVELATIONS REGARDING BENGHAZI

Another email that the administration has been forced into releasing by Judicial Watch, a media watchdog group, has given us more revelations, this time regarding some AP reporter,Matt Lee.The reporter was apparently upset about the Benghazi coverage he was watching on Fox News. So passionately affected was he that he decided to contact Victoria Nuland, a PR specialist at the white house and wine about the news coverage on Fox.This is what Matt Lee said: “I know it is bullshit. But this is killing you guys. Been watching FoxNews tonight and the amount of mis- and dis-information is frankly shocking.” In a later e-mail: “The utter bullshit that is being spread around on Fox, and I assume other outlets including The Guardian [actually The Independent], is really unbelievable.”Just what was the coverage on Fox that he was so upset about?Apparently it was Fox News show host Bill O'rielly who made undesirable comments. Bill speaking to Laura Ingram on his show said “It’s going to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that these attacks in Cairo and Libya were coordinated on 9/11 as a direct act of war against the United States.” Later, he told Ingraham: “The stupid film has nothing to do with it.... It doesn’t have anything to do with it. It’s just an excuse. It’s just an excuse.”Bill turned out to be right. The only shocking misinformation turned out to be by the administration.

If CNN wants to know why people claim they are favorable to democrats and liberals, this, although I admit small, is a good example. Sunny Hostin a legal analyst with CNN, was on with Ashleigh Banfield to discuss Donald Sterling's racist remarks. While on she decides to make a reference to the supreme court case that upheld(6-2) the Michigan law that banned colleges and universities from using preferential treatment with their admissions practices. She makes the incredibly enlightening point that this proves racism still exists. Therefore the supreme court decision was wrong because they were just assuming that we didn't need affirmative action anymore since there was no more racism. What depth of reasoning for a legal analyst. And I understand now she has her own show. I thought only Fox gave their own shows to partisans.

Let me explain the supreme court's decision and their reasoning. They didn't assume that racism didn't exist. If anything they may have believed that the Michigan law banning preferential treatment was combating a form of racism. Regardless of that, in the end they believed that the Michigan legislature had a right to pass a law that outlawed pereferential treatment based on race. I thought the civil rights amendment would have banned that already.The thing that gets me is that not only do liberals like Sunny Hostin believe that these pereferential treatment policies are good practice, they want what many believe to be unfair racial policies to be constitutionally protected. This means if somenone disagrees with her view that preferential treatment policies based on race are good practice and want go through their protected rights as a citizen and pass a law to outlaw those policies, the courts ought prevent them by making up legal reasoning out of thin air deem it unconstitutional. Good thing the supreme court didn't agree. The 4 conservatives, one middle guy, and even liberal had to admit that there is nothing in the constitution that prevents the people of the state of Michigan from practicing their democratic rright to pass laws that it deems will detour unfair racial practices. Unfortunately two liberal judges disagreed. Lets be thankful that it wasn't enough.Naturally, there is no attempt made by Banfield to challenge the notion.